IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Updating RFC 7344 for cross-NS consistency

Peter Thomassen <peter@desec.io> Tue, 28 June 2022 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <peter@desec.io>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25BC6C159481 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 07:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.782
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.782 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=a4a.de
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JgVKXgj6BgCl for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 07:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.a4a.de (mail.a4a.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:10a:1d5c:8000::8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F491C157B45 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 07:23:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=a4a.de; s=20170825; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=HrL2LAMup/JWdCdkt4E/QEe9jexGfEMVwPYHY9XeyY4=; b=dMoAc3vYKoYdqE/1RPPy27RTvT L4OJvxHeI44v04BrapIQdrcispv6xnuR+WZL3ryO5Vo77FlsVaiITREUQMpGJSbCrJKWcmZAa8523 0CvGZDiWzVEAvrxYCOybwf2GFTCJE5bu+fdbn/0KGEzSosgIZnSST1RE5TdaRknzTXv+BR78m1/im F9fvH8V8cxngY/X12pQub4Ux6tzcGVHRfyqlV1Hb0hkYRr+jEHyNZufjai0bVuzXldd6o0NzGMaSA Fj0CqmF4jdpTM8kzyBBfiYfvO10pM4DbnDasf4ETuJIhTsfkWaPLKbkEYSS2CVhwarc2D4B6DjnGy SE+36Ffg==;
Received: from p200300d46f11ea05aa90bbd3c23e9a87.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:d4:6f11:ea05:aa90:bbd3:c23e:9a87]) by mail.a4a.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <peter@desec.io>) id 1o6C7p-00054g-At; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 16:23:33 +0200
Message-ID: <dca35c59-9abb-a775-d0a7-349f6a8b756a@desec.io>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 16:23:32 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <f945a354-77d7-55b8-a2c1-11c8794ae653@desec.io> <9cc0c19f-da83-72ae-a940-16f1662bf29@nohats.ca> <0e230058-080a-dd30-8808-f66eb9a1dc47@desec.io> <CA+nkc8Cc=V6YUSv8L-nbCcs3kfr5gsSStj4CC-e6GwEkFSbSKw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Thomassen <peter@desec.io>
In-Reply-To: <CA+nkc8Cc=V6YUSv8L-nbCcs3kfr5gsSStj4CC-e6GwEkFSbSKw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/QQ6cpCzH-r4VsI6QEdNjaibyrfc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Updating RFC 7344 for cross-NS consistency
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:23:42 -0000

Hi Bob,

On 6/28/22 16:20, Bob Harold wrote:
> But the parent NS set is not covered by DNSSEC, and thus could be spoofed??
> (Wish we could fix that!)

The parental agent (registry, registrar) has off-band definite knowledge of the delegation's NS records.

As an example, the .edu operator knows what umich.edu's NS records are, because the registrant (the university) told them.

Cheers,
Peter

-- 
https://desec.io/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email